User talk:Jusjih

• /Archives to 2009

Page:The works of Li Po - Obata.djvu/109

can you help with the characters at Page:The works of Li Po - Obata.djvu/109? Thx billinghurst (talk) 14:08, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Done.--Jusjih (talk) 02:31, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

Wikilivres stuff

stuff mentioned at Wikisource:Scriptorium#Wikisource:Possible copyright violations re transfer. — billinghurst sDrewth 21:42, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

A Warning to the Curious

Hi, could you undelete A Warning to the Curious which you prevously deleted as a copyvio? The 70-year term has now expired (UK author, died in 1936). Thanks. DuncanHill (talk) 17:47, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

Unfortunately, your request cannot be approved through 2020 per Wikisource:Possible_copyright_violations/Archives/2009-12#Various_works_of_Author:Montague_Rhodes_James and American non-acceptance of the rule of the shorter term, without evidence of USA copyright licensing. PLEASE visit Wikilivres:A Warning to the Curious at the alternate website in Canada. THANK you for your understanding. SORRY for any inconvenience caused by American copyright imperialists.--Jusjih (talk) 22:35, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

OK, thanks, I'll see if I can change the links to Wikisource from enwiki to point to Wikilivres (which I hadn't encountered before). DuncanHill (talk) 10:04, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

You are welcome and perhaps many Wikipedians are unaware of Canadian Wikilivres.--Jusjih (talk) 02:55, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

I'm sure we are unaware, looks like a good site. DuncanHill (talk) 22:26, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

In search of Modernity

Could you have another look at the copyright violations discussion page about the above-speech by Mr Ma Ying-jeou. I have pointed out a couple of further important things since you last contributed in this matter. I believe the speech can be lawfully hosted on this website. Thanks. Formosa (talk) 09:17, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

Reviewing your deleted contributions, you seem to have many deleted copyvios. If so, I cannot help you a lot as I am more busy on Chinese Wikisource.--Jusjih (talk) 00:08, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

Alternatively, you may add more texts of the United Nations Security Council Resolutions that have copyright released to the public domain per {{PD-UN}}. That will keep you occupied until every resolution is added here.--Jusjih (talk) 00:29, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

I have only asked you to help with one work. You did offer to help me with it. I can't help but feel disappointed that you now won't do so. Formosa (talk) 13:29, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

This is where you left off in the discussion:

Jusjih - Many thanks for your assistance. I appreciate it. Given your conclusion that you think Taiwan can be included on the List, please could you have a look at: The Quest for Modernity. That is an article containing a speech by ROC President Ma Ying-Jeou. User: Billinghurst (Administrator) deleted it. If you think it is in order, please Billinghurst, could you restore the speech. Or please could you discuss this with Administrator Jusjih. Thanks. I hope this speech can be restored. I believe its being stored here would not infringe ROC copyright. Formosa (talk) 16:51, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

Unfortunately I cannot undelete it when it was made at Harvard University in the USA where this website is located, without evidence of USA copyright permission. As {{PD-in-USGov}} says that 17 U.S.C. 105 does not automatically apply outside the USA, neither does Article 9 of the ROC Copyright Act automatically apply outside Taiwan. Please explain which ROC website you saw the text, or I uphold Billinghurst's deletion as valid.--Jusjih (talk) 03:23, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

The speech has been published on the official website of the Office of the President of the Republic of China. You can read it by going to [1] and then clicking on press releases and opening the link entitled "President Ma's remarks at the video conference with the Fairbank Center, Harvard University". Thanks for looking into this. It is appreciated. Formosa (talk) 10:38, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

Also User:Jusjih, you are mistaken when you say "I cannot undelete it when it was made at Harvard University in the USA". President Ma Ying-jeou made the speech in the Republic of China at his Presidential Office in Taipei. It was merely broadcast live to the Fairbank Centre, Harvard University, USA. User:Jusjih - Do these facts now change the position? Formosa (talk) 07:13, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Please appeal the deletion per Wikisource:Deletion_policy#Undeletion at Wikisource:Proposed deletions.--Jusjih (talk) 21:19, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

Unfair block

Dear Jusjih – I have become fairly active on the Wikisource:Possible copyright violations ‎ discussion page in recent times. You are probably familiar with some of the issues I have raised there (including what is meant by an “Edict of Government”). On 2 May 2010 I made a number of edits. Most of these edits related to me “tagging, hiding and listing for discussion” works that were labeled as “Edicts of Government” (e.g. South African political speeches, a national anthem and other works). The same day Administrator Billinghurst blocked me. I cannot say precisely why – as he did not give precise reasons – but the general heading he gave was that “Okay, that is too rampant” (i.e. I was being too active in ““tagging, hiding and listing for discussion”).

I have disagreed with Billinghurst on a number of copyright points of late – basically, I would like the same standard to be applied to all works. The same high standard that is – even if that means that a lot of works need to be listed for discussion etc - but his approach is different. I think Billinghurst views me as ‘trouble’. In contrast, I think I have made a worthwhile contribution, prompting interesting discussions, greater clarity and the removal of some works. Indeed, the works I “tagged, hid and listed for discussion” on 2 May 2010 have led to interesting copyright discussions on the copyright violations discussion page. I would like Billinghurst to apologise for blocking me and somehow “expunge” my record.

I would appreciate any contribution you would like to make on my talk page where my block is being discussed. I am sending this message to all persons who have participated on the same copyright violation discussions as me. I do not know how else to generate further participation in the discussion concerning my block save direct messages – as I cannot list this matter (a personal one) on the copyright violations page. The discussion is at User talk:Formosa. Given my treatment, I admit to feeling a bit disheartened about my continuing involvement in the copyright violations project. Thanks. Formosa (talk) 13:08, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

Talkback

You have new messages

Hello, Jusjih. You have new messages at Wikisource:Bot_requests.
Message added 14:49, 21 October 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

I have learnt some more about AWB, and had a go. Special:Contributions/SDrewthbot — billinghurst sDrewth 14:49, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

Thank you very much for your reply, as I do not know how to make bots.--Jusjih (talk) 03:51, 22 October 2010 (UTC)

墨子的英語翻譯

我在轉譯墨子。我想要邀請許多中語說者對於這個作業。我想要轉譯那個經因為沒有足以英語翻譯的文言作品在維基書庫中。您的加入將很多感激。 O.J.S. (talk) 00:50, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

No. I cannot help on this. Unfortunately I cannot translate classical Chinese well.--Jusjih (talk) 01:10, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

Alright. If you do encounter anybody who can, please, point them in the direction of the project. O.J.S. (talk) 02:03, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

Question

Hello.

I was wondering how best to approach this list of broken redirects and stopped myself from deleting them and check with you first in case there is some standard way to soft redirect to the now exported articles that I don't know about. -- George Orwell III (talk) 22:26, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

I just added Template:Wikilivres page to those with incoming redirects to explain why we cannot host the texts. The template can also be used even without incoming redirects. Then we need not delete the redirects.--Jusjih (talk) 01:33, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

(Wúménguān)

A wikipedian stopped by asking for some help with this text that they wished to post on Wikisource to support related wikipedia article. If I understand the copyright situation correctly, the 1934 translator of this publication, regarding a 13th century Mandarin work, did not renew their US copyright claim in the early 1960s. This inaction on their part qualifies this translation for the public domain within the US. I was able to verify that the text found on the link above follows on-line versions exactly. Would like your review of this situation to ensure we did not overstep any boundaries. Thank-you for your help with this matter…JamAKiska (talk) 23:25, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

As long as the non-renewal of the US copyright is ascertained, we can have the translation. I just added 1990 to PD-US-no-renewal to warn the non-acceptance of the rule of the shorter term in certain countries and areas. Thanks for your message.--Jusjih (talk) 23:04, 20 February 2011 (UTC)

Thank-you for your timely help with this matter…JamAKiska (talk) 01:27, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

Transwiki

There a group of article at Wikisource:Proposed deletions#Anecdotes & Epigrams to transwiki to wikiquote and hopefully merge into q:Diogenes of Sinope, Following the directions at m:Help:Transwiki I have manually moved one in and documented at q:Talk:Diogenes of Sinope and q:Wikiquote:Transwiki log/Articles moved to here. I see that you have import tools to do the full move from wikisource to wikiquote, if you would like to move them all that would be great, if not I will continue with the manual move next week. JeepdaySock (talk) 10:59, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

Daany Beédxe

According to OTRS #2011122010010631, the author gives permission to publish the book here, Regards Ezarate (talk) 13:17, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

I have no access to OTRS, so I cannot verify your information. Please tell this to the OTRS volunteers, so the fact can be properly posted.--Jusjih (talk) 14:27, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

Photography: Theory and Practice

Did you still want to do more moving of files before this is closed? Wikisource:Possible_copyright_violations#Photography:_Theory_and_Practice. Jeepday (talk) 14:38, 23 June 2012 (UTC)

To be specific, I prefer to move all of the files and related templates after being sure that Wikisource cannot keep them in the USA. Now, are there any good reasons to keep the work and its files here in the USA? If not, I will move them to Canadian Wikilivres.--Jusjih (talk) 14:41, 23 June 2012 (UTC)

My reading of the discussion indicates that the US copyright is unclear. There are good arguments for and against, but we did not reach a clear consensus to keep, so have to default to delete when closing copyvio. You indicated it would be ok on Canadian Wikilivres, so I am just waiting for you to finish the move and I will close and delete here. Jeepday (talk) 14:50, 23 June 2012 (UTC)

Unfortunately I have trouble importing to Canadian Wikilivres now with the message repeated: "Import failed: Loss of session data. Please try again." I will try again later. Thanks for your patience.--Jusjih (talk) 17:28, 23 June 2012 (UTC)

Icelandic wikisource

I posted a reply on the Icelandic wikisource to your message regarding my sysop status there. Edinborgarstefan (talk) 22:01, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Letters from the Earth

Do you know when according to US law we will be able to host this? It's a very confusing policy considering when the author died how it hasn't. Etym (talk) 01:59, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

As its author Mark twain died in 1910 but the work was posthumously published in 1962 with American copyright renewal, it is legally copyrightable in the USA through 2057.--Jusjih (talk) 08:17, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

Desiderata

I started a discussion at Wikisource:Possible copyright violations#Desiderata, as the deleting admin your input would be appreciated :) — Hobart (talk) 08:14, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

Translation namespace

Hi, I think the discussion that you're after is Wikisource:Administrators' noticeboard/Archives/2013#New Name Space. The details of the Bugzilla are in there as well. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 06:25, 21 March 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the hint, so I may ask Chinese Wikisource users.--Jusjih (talk) 06:01, 22 March 2014 (UTC)

Automated import of openly licensed scholarly articles

Hello Jusjih,

We are putting together a proposal about the automated import of openly licensed scholarly articles, and since you are an active Wikisourceror, we'd appreciate yourcomments on the Scriptorium. For convenience, I'm copying our proposal here:

The idea of systematically importing openly licensed scholarly articles into Wikisource has popped up from time to time. For instance, it formed the core of WikiProject Academic Papers and is mentioned in the Wikisource vision. However, the Wikiproject relied on human power, never reached its full potential, and eventually became inactive. The vision has yet to materialise.

We plan to bridge the gap through automation. We are a subset of WikiProject Open Access (user:Daniel Mietchen, user:Maximilanklein, user:MattSenate), and we have funding from the Open Society Foundations via Wikimedia Deutschland to demo suitable workflows at Wikimania (see project page).

Specifically, we plan to import Open Access journal articles into Wikisource when they are cited on Wikipedia. The import would be performed by a group of bots intended to make reference handling more interoperable across Wikimedia sites. Their main tasks are:

• (on Wikipedia) signalling which references are openly licensed, and link them to the full text on Wikisource, the media on Commons and the metadata on Wikidata;
• (on Commons) importing images and other media associated with the source article;
• (on Wikisource) importing the full text of the source article and embedding the media in there;
• (on Wikidata) handling the metadata associated with the source article, and signalling that the full text is on Wikisource and the media on Commons.

These Open Access imports on Wikisource will be linked to and from other Wikimedia sister sites. Our first priority though will be linking from English Wikipedia, focusing on the most cited Open Access papers, and the top-100 medical articles.

In order to move forward with this, we need

• General community approval
• Community feedback on workflows and scrutiny on our test imports in specific.
• Bot permission. For more technical information read our bot spec on Github.

Maximilianklein (talk) 18:26, 20 June 2014 (UTC)

Idgah

According to Clindberg, the Indian copyright law was not retroactive, and thus this is out of copyright in the US. I'm going to undelete it if you don't object, and you can handle it as you need to on Wikilivres.--Prosfilaes (talk) 22:08, 8 October 2014 (UTC)

New Proposal Notification - Replacement of common main-space header template

Announcing the listing of a new formal proposal recently added to the Scriptorium community-discussion page, Proposals section, titled:

• Switch header template foundation from table-based to division-based

The proposal entails the replacement of the current Header template familiar to most with a structurally redesigned new Header template. Replacement is a needed first step in series of steps needed to properly address the long time deficiencies behind several issues as well as enhance our mobile device presence.

There should be no significant operational or visual differences between the existing and proposed Header templates under normal usage (i.e. Desktop view). The change is entirely structural -- moving away from the existing HTML all Table make-up to an all Div[ision] based one.

Please examine the testcases where the current template is compared to the proposed replacement. Don't forget to also check Mobile Mode from the testcases page -- which is where the differences between current header template & proposed header template will be hard to miss.

For those who are concerned over the possible impact replacement might have on specific works, you can test the replacement on your own by entering edit mode, substituting the header tag {{header with {{header/sandbox and then previewing the work with the change in place. Saving the page with the change in place should not be needed but if you opt to save the page instead of just previewing it, please remember to revert the change soon after your done inspecting the results.

Your questions or comments are welcomed. At the same time I personally urge participants to support this proposed change. -- George Orwell III (talk) 02:04, 13 January 2015 (UTC)

Pellucidar

Why did you delete Pellucidar? As I said at the DR, there's no renewal on it, nor any evidence it was substantially different then the previously serialized version.--Prosfilaes (talk) 15:24, 4 June 2015 (UTC)

I am reopening the case to answer your appeal.--Jusjih (talk) 01:08, 5 June 2015 (UTC)

File:Handbook for Hennepin County Grand Jurors.pdf

Can you reconsider your deletion? Recall, "Edicts of government, such as judicial opinions, administrative rulings, legislative enactments, public ordinances, and similar official legal documents are not copyrightable for reasons of public policy." A handbook for Grand Jurors sounds to me like a handbook that tells Grand Jurors what the gov't requires, allows and forbids of them in their work. Very much like the Massachusetts building code (which is an edict per judicial precedent) tells architects and contractors what the gov't requires, allows and forbids of them in their work. --Elvey (talk) 21:38, 21 April 2016 (UTC)

Deleted per Wikisource:Copyright_discussions/Archives/2015#Miscellaneous_things_that_aren.27t_really_instruments_of_law_or_whatever, please appeal at Wikisource:Copyright discussions by adding "Re: file name" as I consider speedy undeletion undesirable.--Jusjih (talk) 01:35, 22 April 2016 (UTC)

Yes, I'd seen that discussion. Will appeal. Makes sense. (And best practice is to ask the deleter first.) --Elvey (talk) 00:38, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

If your measure of adminship ...

... is edit summaries, then heaven help us. Maybe we should stop all the other important things that we do as administrators and concentrate on fixing inane edit summaries over the things for which we are given admin tools, and for which we should be judged. We are not WP where we are making judgmental or similar edits; we are predominantly transcribing existing works, and the edits summarise themselves. I am disappointed that you think so lowly of us to have such a naive approach. But what the heck, maybe I clearly need to find my encouragement elsewhere. — billinghurst sDrewth 13:54, 28 August 2016 (UTC)

Template:PD-USGov-VOA

Can you explain why do you think PD-USGov-VOA is invalid for works published after June 2013? If this is true, all other VOA related templates on Wikimedia projects need to be modified too.--維基小霸王 (talk) 05:52, 18 November 2016 (UTC)

Please read commons:Commons:Deletion_requests/Template:PD-USGov-VOA while http://www.voanews.com/p/5338.html as of 2016-11-19T01:30Z says: "All text, audio and video material produced exclusively by the Voice of America is in the public domain."--Jusjih (talk) 01:30, 19 November 2016 (UTC)

I don't think there is any change. Please read commons:Commons:Undeletion_requests/Archive/2016-08#Original_materials_of_VOA.

May 2012:

"All text, audio and video material produced exclusively by the Voice of America is in the public domain."

November 2016:

"All text, audio and video material produced exclusively by the Voice of America is in the public domain. "--維基小霸王 (talk) 07:39, 19 November 2016 (UTC)

Then appeal the template change.--Jusjih (talk) 01:25, 20 November 2016 (UTC)

ping latency

I got a ping, today, that Billinghurst sent in June 2017. I don't know why it took a year and a half to be delivered.

Anyhow, you closed Wikisource:Copyright_discussions/Archives/2017#Letter_from_Ali_Khan,_Majid_Khan's_father. Billinghurst wrote "No evidence that the work has been released to the publid domain or freely licensed..."

Excuse me, wasn't the letter part of Majid Khan's habeas corpus petition? Legal filings, like habeas corpus petitions, are supposed to be public, correct?

If a legal journal republishes a court filing, or hosts a copy in its cloud, as a courtesy to readers, that does not give the publication any intellectual property rights to that court filing, correct?

When an appellant files documents with the court, have they waived their intellectual property rights? If so then can I ask if that isn't sufficient to restore this document? Geo Swan (talk) 23:08, 23 January 2019 (UTC)

I have not heard of evidence that filing documents with the court waives the intellectual property rights, thus not ready to accept your appeal. Please appeal at Wikisource:Copyright discussions to get wider consideration.--Jusjih (talk) 05:09, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

In that case could you email me the text? Geo Swan (talk) 06:01, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

A new link from CSRT Summary of Evidence memo for Majid Khan has been added.--Jusjih (talk) 04:41, 28 January 2019 (UTC)

deletion problem

Hi-- Yesterday I requested deletion of Once a Week (magazine), Series 1, Volume I/Once a week saying that it was a "duplicate of Once a Week (magazine)/Series 1/Volume 1/Once a Week". I shouldn’t have used the word duplicate because the two pages weren’t exactly the same — you deleted the contents of Once a Week (magazine)/Series 1/Volume 1/Once a Week in order to merge, when that was the version that should have been kept. Could you please restore the old version of Once a Week (magazine)/Series 1/Volume 1/Once a Week? Thanks. Levana Taylor (talk) 15:36, 20 August 2019 (UTC)

All deleted versions of Once a Week (magazine), Series 1, Volume I/Once a week are yours having tagged speedy deletion. I merged the earlier versions by user:GinnevraDubois into Once a Week (magazine)/Series 1/Volume 1/Once a Week. Which version is preferred now?--Jusjih (talk) 16:39, 20 August 2019 (UTC)

It should have been my version kept not the one by Ginnevra Dubois, which is very old (and I have tried to contact Ginnevra in the past to talk about combining our contributions, but she doesn’t reply) Levana Taylor (talk) 16:59, 20 August 2019 (UTC)

Your version is already the latest.--Jusjih (talk) 17:06, 20 August 2019 (UTC)

No, it’s not. What you did was, you merged the two by moving Ginnevra’s page to my page over the contents I had put there. The contents of my page should have been kept. Levana Taylor (talk) 17:08, 20 August 2019 (UTC)

Please check the difference [2], using Index:Once a Week Jul - Dec 1859.pdf as the source. Merging your version over Ginnevra’s page then moving back means your version being the last.--Jusjih (talk) 17:16, 20 August 2019 (UTC)

Oy, sorry for the confusion. You are right. I apologize. Levana Taylor (talk) 17:28, 20 August 2019 (UTC)

Chinese/Japanese

Hi, I noticed you were bilingual and hoped you could spend a bit of time helping to trim down the 58 entries at Category:Pages with missing Japanese characters and Category:Pages with missing Chinese characters, thanks! Lemuritus (talk) 05:06, 24 December 2019 (UTC)

I will get to Chinese when I have time.--Jusjih (talk) 06:08, 24 December 2019 (UTC)

calligraphy

Do you think you could add the text of ja:Page:柳沢信大『粤東俗字便蒙解』.djvu/4 and 5? (or maybe locate someone who can?) Suzukaze-c (talk) 04:55, 24 March 2020 (UTC)

Maybe I will try, but not perfectly.--Jusjih (talk) 05:34, 24 March 2020 (UTC)

How we will see unregistered users

Hi!

You get this message because you are an admin on a Wikimedia wiki.

When someone edits a Wikimedia wiki without being logged in today, we show their IP address. As you may already know, we will not be able to do this in the future. This is a decision by the Wikimedia Foundation Legal department, because norms and regulations for privacy online have changed.

Instead of the IP we will show a masked identity. You as an admin will still be able to access the IP. There will also be a new user right for those who need to see the full IPs of unregistered users to fight vandalism, harassment and spam without being admins. Patrollers will also see part of the IP even without this user right. We are also working on better tools to help.

If you have not seen it before, you can read more on Meta. If you want to make sure you don’t miss technical changes on the Wikimedia wikis, you can subscribe to the weekly technical newsletter.

We have two suggested ways this identity could work. We would appreciate your feedback on which way you think would work best for you and your wiki, now and in the future. You can let us know on the talk page. You can write in your language. The suggestions were posted in October and we will decide after 17 January.

Thank you. /Johan (WMF)

18:14, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

New editor adding works of Xin Qiji

Hi, I'm not sure if the poems that User:Loukus999 is adding are new translations or not. The language feels modern to me, but I'm not sure. Either way there's no source given. I wondered if you would mind having a look and helping the editor to meet our requirements. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 04:52, 15 November 2023 (UTC)

Reminded at User talk:Loukus999. Thanks.--Jusjih (talk) 05:03, 15 November 2023 (UTC)

I did some poking around. The lists of works were machine translated from the Author pages at zh.WS. The information seems to have come via inf.news --EncycloPetey (talk) 22:02, 27 November 2023 (UTC)

User:Jusjih/Jimbo Wales against attacks on userpages

Hi Jusjih,

I moved User:Jusjih/Jimbo Wales against attacks on userpages to your userspace because while this is an issue that seems to be very important to you personally, it is not a topic of high topicality on enWS (i.e. "don't import drama from other projects"). You can keep working on it as a users-space draft and if you still think it is of community-wide significance here on enWS then you can poll the Scriptorium on whether they think this is something that should be in the project namespace. Xover (talk) 12:22, 13 January 2024 (UTC)

Edit summaries

I've noticed that you've often !voted neutral on confirmation discussions, asking for more edit summaries. I was curious as to why you did that, as most edits, like N (→ Proofread), are quite self-explanatory, and often the fraction of non-proofreading edits (taking edits outside of pagespace and mainspace as a measure) is very close to the fraction of edits without summaries. (Taking EncycloPetey for an example, 29% summaries, 26% non-proofreading). Regards, — Alien  3
3 3 06:55, 2 October 2024 (UTC)

Being an administrator in both English and Chinese on so many wikis, I have seen certain Chinese administrators deleting pages without clear reasons. Thus I am reluctant to directly support administrators with too many blank edit summaries. Being neutral means not opposing, either.--Jusjih (talk) 16:35, 2 October 2024 (UTC)

Yes, of course, neutral isn't oppose, but I'm just trying to understand your reasoning. If it's deletion you're concerned with, why are you also !neutraling for admins that haven't deleted a page in 12 years have justified all their latest deletions looked at the wp not ws log by mistake (taking EP as an example again). — Alien  3
3 3 16:40, 2 October 2024 (UTC)

Just a friendly advice.--Jusjih (talk) 17:37, 2 October 2024 (UTC)